Journal of the History of Biology

, Volume 45, Issue 2, pp 329–352 | Cite as

Questions of Methodology in Aristotle’s Zoology: A Medieval Perspective

  • Ahuva Gaziel


During the Middle Ages Aristotle’s treatises were accessible to intellectuals via translations and commentaries. Among his works on natural philosophy, the zoological books received relatively little scholarly attention, though several medieval commentators carefully studied Aristotle’s investigations of the animal kingdom. Averroes completed in 1169 a commentary on an Arabic translation of Aristotle’s Parts of Animals and Generation of Animals. In 1323 Gersonides completed his supercommentary on a Hebrew translation of Averroes’ commentary. This article examines how these two medieval commentators interpret the first book of Aristotle’s Parts of Animals, at the center of which stand methodological questions regarding the study of animals. Aristotle’s discussion of classification is presented by Averroes and Gersonides in light of an epistemological debate concerning the requisite method for scientific inquiries and discoveries. Sense perception is contrasted with rational reasoning, and ultimately a combined method is proposed, sense perception maintaining supremacy. These commentators outline a clear link between the systematic arrangement of animal species as offered by Aristotle, and his subsequent logical demonstrations which, according to them, form the core of biological investigations.


Aristotle Averroes Gersonides zoology classification 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aristotle. 1971. Generation of Animals: The Arabic Translation Commonly Ascribed to Yaḥyā ibn al-Biṭrīq (Edited with Introduction and Glossary by J. Brugman and H. J. Drossaart Lulofs). Leiden: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
  2. Aristotle. 1978a. Aristotle’s De motu animalium (Text with Translation, Commentary, and Interpretive Essays by Martha C. Nussbaum). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Aristotle. 1978b. The Arabic Version of Aristotle’s Parts of Animals Book XI-XIV of the Kitāb al-Hayawān (A Critical Edition with Introduction and Selected Glossary by Remke Kruk). Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  4. Aristotle. 2001. On the Parts of Animals I-IV (Translated with an Introduction and Commentary by James G. Lennox). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Averroes. Commentary on the Book of Animals (=C. BA). MS. Paris – Bibliotheque Nationale héb. 956/9 [IMHM #32606].Google Scholar
  6. [Averroes] Ibn Rushd. 1984. Metaphysics (A Translation with Introduction of Ibn Rushd’s Commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics, Book Lām by Charles Genequand). Leiden: E.J. Brill.Google Scholar
  7. Balme, David M. 1962. “Genos and Eidos in Aristotle’s Biology.” The Classical Quarterlys, New Series 12(1): 81–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Balme, David M. 1987. “The Place of Biology in Aristotle’s Philosophy.” Gotthelf Allan and James G. Lennox (eds.), Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 9–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bos, Gerrit and Fontaine, Resianne. 1999. “Medico-philosophical Controversies in Nathan b. Yo’el Falaquera’s ‘Sefer Ṣori ha-Guf’.” Jewish Quarterly Review 90(1–2): 27–60.Google Scholar
  10. Coope, Ursula. 2005. Time for Aristotle: Physics IV. 10–14. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Efron, Noah J. 2007. Judaism and Science: A Historical Introduction. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  12. Fontaine, Resianne. 1994a. “Aristotle vs. Galen in the Zoological Part of R. Judah ben Solomon’s Midrash Ha-Hochma.” Proceedings of the 11th World Congress of Jewish Studies 2: 41–46.Google Scholar
  13. Fontaine, Resianne. 1994b. “The Facts of Life: The Nature of the Female Contribution to Generation According to Judah ha-Cohen’s Midrash Ha-Hokhmah and Contemporary Texts.” Medizinhistorisches Journal 29: 333–361.Google Scholar
  14. Freudenthal, Gad. 1989. “Human Felicity and Astronomy in Gersonides’ Revolt Against Ptolemy” [Hebrew]. Da‘at 22: 55–72.Google Scholar
  15. Freudenthal, Gad. 2002. “The Medieval Astrologization of Aristotle’s Biology: Averroes on the Role of the Celestial Bodies in the Generation of Animate Beings.” Arabic Science and Philosophy 12: 111–137.Google Scholar
  16. Gaziel, Ahuva. 2008. The Biology of Levi ben Gershom (Gersonides) [Hebrew]. Ph.D. Dissertation, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan.Google Scholar
  17. Gersonides. Supercommentary on the Book of Animals (=SC. BA). MS. Vatican – Urbinati ebr. 42 [IMHM #681].Google Scholar
  18. Gersonides. 1998. Commentary on Song of Songs (Translated from the Hebrew with an Introduction and Annotations by Menachem Kellner). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Goldstein, Bernard R. 1972. “Theory and Observation in Medieval Astronomy.” Isis 63: 39–47. Reprinted in: Bernard R. Goldstein. 1985. Theory and Observation in Ancient and Medieval Astronomy. London: Variorum Reprints.Google Scholar
  20. Gotthelf, Allan and Lennox, James G. (eds.). 1987. Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Grene, Marjorie. 1963. A Portrait of Aristotle. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  22. Grene, Marjorie. 2000. “Recent Work on Aristotelian Biology.” Perspectives on Science 8(4): 444–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hankinson, R. J. 1995. “Philosophy of Science” and “Science.” Jonathan Barnes (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Aristotle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 109–167.Google Scholar
  24. Harvey, Steven. 1977. Averroes on the Principles of Nature: The Middle Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics I-II. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.Google Scholar
  25. Harvey, Steven. 1985. “The Hebrew Translation of Averroes’ Prooemium to his Long Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics.” Proceedings of the American Academy for Jewish Research 52: 55–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Harvey, Steven. 1997. “Averroes’ Use of Examples in his Middle Commentary on the Prior Analytics, and Some Remarks on his Role as Commentator.” Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 7: 91–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Harvey, Steven. 1999. “Conspicuous by his Absence: Averroes’ Place Today as an Interpreter of Aristotle.” Gerhard Endress and Jan A. Aertsen (eds.), Averroes and the Aristotelian Tradition: Sources, Constitution and Reception of the Philosophy of Ibn Rushd (1126-1198). Proceedings of the Fourth Symposium Averroicum (Cologne, 1996). Leiden: Brill, pp. 32–49.Google Scholar
  28. Harvey, Steven. 2000. “Shem-Tov ibn Falaquera’s De‘ot ha-Filosofim: Its Sources and Use of Sources.” Harvey Steven (ed.), The Medieval Hebrew Encyclopedia of Science and Philosophy. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 211–247.Google Scholar
  29. Harvey, Steven. 2009. “When did Jews Begin to Consider Averroes the Commentator?” J. Meirinhos and O. Weijers (eds.), Florilegium Mediaevale. Louvain-la-Neuve: Brepols, pp. 279–296.Google Scholar
  30. Kellner, Menachem. 1995. “Gersonides on Imitatio Dei and the Dissemination of Scientific Knowledge.” Jewish Quarterly Review 85: 275–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Klein-Braslavy, Sara. 2003. “La Structure des Commentaires et la Manière de Commenter les Textes.” Colette Sirat, S. Klein-Braslavy and O. Weijers (eds.), Les Mèthodes de Travail de Gersonide et le Maniement du Savoir chez les Scolastiques. Paris: J. Vrin, pp. 73–89.Google Scholar
  32. Klein-Braslavy, Sara. 2005. “The Alexandrian Prologue Paradigm in Gersonides’ Writings.” Jewish Quarterly Review 95(2): 257–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Langermann, Y. Tzvi. 1999. Levi ben Gershom (Gersonides), The Wars of the Lord, Vol. 3. (Translated with Notes by Seymour Feldman). Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, pp. 506–519. Google Scholar
  34. Lear, Jonathan. 1988. Aristotle: The Desire to Understand. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Lennox, James G. 1999. “The Place of Mankind in Aristotle’s Zoology.” Philosophical Topics 27(1): 1–16.Google Scholar
  36. Lennox, James G. 2001. Aristotle’s Philosophy of Biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Lloyd, Geoffrey Ernst Richard. 1962. “The Development of Aristotle’s Theory of the Classification of Animals.” Phronesis 6: 59–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mancha, José Luis. 1998. “Heuristic Reasoning: Approximation Procedures in Levi ben Gerson’s Astronomy.” Archive for History of Exact Sciences 52: 13–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Manekin, Charles H. 1992. “Gersonides: Logic, Sciences and Philosophy.” Gad Freudenthal (ed.), Studies on Gersonides: A Fourteenth-Century Jewish Philosopher- Scientist. Leiden: Brill, pp. 285–303.Google Scholar
  40. Pellegrin, Pierre. 1986. Aristotle’s Classification of Animals: Biology and the Conceptual Unity of the Aristotelian Corpus. Berkeley: University of California Press. Translated by Anthony Preus.Google Scholar
  41. Touati, Charles. 1973. La Pensee Philosophique et Theologique de Gersonide. Paris: Minuit.Google Scholar
  42. Van Oppenraay, Aafke M. I. 1999. “Michael Scot’s Arabic-Latin Translation of Aristotle’s Book on Animals.” Carlos Steel, Guy Guldentops and Pieter Beullens (eds.), Aristotle’s Animals in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Leuven: Leuven University Press, pp. 31–43.Google Scholar
  43. Wilson, Malcolm. 1997. “Analogy in Aristotle’s Biology.” Ancient Philosophy 17: 335–358.Google Scholar
  44. Wolfson, Harry A. 1973. “The Twice-Revealed Averroes.” Isadore Twersky and George H. Williams (eds.), Studies in the History of Philosophy and Religion, Vol. 1. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, pp. 371–401.Google Scholar
  45. Zonta, Mauro. 1991. “Ibn al-Ṭayyib Zoologist and Ḥunayn ibn Isḥāq’s Revision of Aristotle’s De Animalibus – New Evidence from the Hebrew Tradition.” Aram 3(1–2): 235–247.Google Scholar
  46. Zonta, Mauro. 1996. “Mineralogy, Botany and Zoology in Medieval Hebrew Encyclopedias.” Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 6: 265–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zonta, Mauro. 1999. “The Zoological Writings in the Hebrew Tradition: The Hebrew Approach to Aristotle’s Zoological Writings and to Their Ancient and Medieval Commentators in the Middle Ages.” Carlos Steel, Guy Guldentops and Pieter Beullens (eds.), Aristotle’s Animals in the Middle Ages and Renaissance. Leuven: Leuven University Press, pp. 44–68.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sidney M. Edelstein Center for the History and Philosophy of Science, Technology, and MedicineThe Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations